Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User analysis tool

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SlimVirgin (talk | contribs) at 20:05, 9 May 2014 (ce). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Purpose of page

I've opened this page for a discussion of the proposed removal of the opt-in from the User analysis tool, for users who have edited the English Wikipedia. The tool is hosted by the Foundation and run by Cyberpower678. The main purpose of the page is: (1) to invite stakeholders to offer background on the legal, technical, privacy and possible editor-retention issues; (2) to determine whether we need another RfC; and (3) if so, whether it should be here or on Meta, and what we should ask.

Background

The User analysis tool used to be X's edit counter. It was run by Soxred93 until he retired, and was hosted on the toolserver in Germany. Because it was hosted in Germany and (if I've understood correctly) European privacy legislation prohibited creating or posting these profiles without users' consent, we all had to opt-in for the stats to be collected and made public.

The tool presents aggregated data from users' contributions to create user profiles (monthly stats, to which namespaces edits were made, most-edited articles, etc). There are plans to expand it to include edit summary analysis, edit analysis (don't know what that is), and files uploaded. See example of an opt-in (this was posted on the most recent RfC with Wbm1058's consent).

Although the information is based on public data, its presentation makes certain things much easier to find, including in some cases a user's location and identity. The profiles can be misleading as well as revealing. For example, a user's most-edited article could be something he was briefly involved in years ago, giving a misleading impression as to overall or current interests. This could cause a problem for people who have edited contentious articles.

Within the last year or so, the tool was moved to the Foundation's servers in the United States, so the same privacy concerns no longer apply. When Soxred93 retired, Cyberpower took over the tool and renamed it the User analysis tool. He has initiated three RfCs to ask that the opt-in be removed. The latest closed on 6 May and gained 57 percent support in favour of removing the opt-in, which was closed as consensus. The RfC was problematic in several ways (in my view); more about that below shortly.

In the meantime, I'm pinging several people who have discussed this. It would be very helpful if they could outline their views or offer information about previous discussions, so that everything is in one place. Philippe (WMF), LuisV (WMF), Coren, Cyberpower678, WJBscribe, AFBorchert, NordNordWest, Aschmidt, Petrarchan47. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:12, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Requests for comment/X!'s Edit Counter, Meta, June – July 2013, no consensus to remove opt-in (retain opt-in: 259; replace with opt-out: 26; remove opt-in completely: 195).
  2. Talk:Privacy policy, Meta, December 2013 – February 2014, discussion about whether to make the opt-in project-based, rather than movement-based or individual-based. No conclusion was reached.
  3. Edit Counter Optin (RfC), enwiki Village Pump, April – May 2014, closed as consensus to remove opt-in from enwiki editors (retain opt-in: 108; replace with opt-out: 22; remove opt-in completely: 173. This resulted in 57 percent in favour of removal).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/User_analysis_tool&oldid=607819425"